Impact of distribution of the agricultural property stock of the state treasury on the structure of agricuktural holdings in 1996-2010

As a result of “primary” distribution of the Agricultural Property Stock of the State Treasury (1992-1996), the structure of agricultural holdings changed considerably as regards ownership, legal and organisational issues and area. However, these changes clearly deviated from the adopted assumptions. The crucial goal of speeding up ownership changes, thus improving the agrarian structure of the existing individual farms, was executed to a minor degree. What was established, though, was a substantial group of large-area farms of natural persons and private legal entities. Therefore, a trend to correct the structure was increasingly more clear in agricultural policy. The paper attempts to assess its effects. The analyses held show that the corrections failed to bring considerable effects. The impact of distribution of the Agricultural Property Stock of the State Treasury after 1996 was slight and gradually dropping. The changes in the structure of holdings in the pre-accession period continued the trends noted in 1992-1996. Also in the post-accession period the operations of the Agency had no greater impact on extension of farms of natural persons of 1-100 ha, including farms of 20-100 ha, i.e. strong family farms. Changes in this group of farms took place primarily under the influence of liquidation of small-area farms, family sections of farms, private land trade and land rents from other entities than Agricultural Property Agency of the State Treasury (now Agricultural Property Agency). Whereas the actions of the Agency, in particular based on the statutory provisions on counteracting excessive concentration of agricultural land of 2003 – which consisted in “secondary” distribution of land belonging to the State Treasury – had an important impact on the development of the group of farms of natural persons of 100 ha and more, and its structure, especially on accelerating development in the group of 100-300 ha and hindering development in the groups of farms of 500 ha and more. These changes largely followed from adjusting farms of natural persons to the upper area limit of family farms set by the legislator at 300 ha of UAA.